Treatises on Friendship and Old Age
interests, purpose, and aims, without exception. Then if the case arises
of a friend's wish (not strictly right in itself) calling for support in
a matter involving his life or reputation, we must make some concession
from the straight path--on condition, that is to say, that extreme
disgrace is not the consequence. Something must be conceded to
friendship. And yet we must not be entirely careless of our reputation,
nor regard the good opinion of our fellow-citizens as a weapon which we
can afford to despise in conducting the business of our life, however
lowering it may be to tout for it by flattery and smooth words. We must
by no means abjure virtue, which secures us affection.
But to return again to Scipio, the sole author of the discourse on
friendship. He used to complain that there was nothing on which men
bestowed so little pains: that every one could tell exactly how many
goats or sheep he had, but not how many friends; and while they took
pains in procuring the former, they were utterly careless in selecting
friends, and possessed no particular marks, so to speak, or tokens by
which they might judge of their suitability for friendship. Now the
qualities we ought to look out for in making our selection are firmness,
stability, constancy. There is a plentiful lack of men so endowed, and
it is difficult to form a judgment without testing. Now this testing
can only be made during the actual existence of the friendship; for
friendship so often precedes the formation of a judgment, and makes a
previous test impossible. If we are prudent then, we shall rein in our
impulse to affection as we do chariot horses. We make a preliminary
trial of horses. So we should of friendship; and should test our
friends' characters by a kind of tentative friendship. It may often
happen that the untrustworthiness of certain men is completely displayed
in a small money matter; others who are proof against a small sum are
detected if it be large. But even if some are found who think it mean
to prefer money to friendship, where shall we look for those who put
friendship before office, civil or military promotions, and political
power, and who, when the choice lies between these things on the one
side and the claims of friendship on the other, do not give a strong
preference to the former? It is not in human nature to be indifferent
to political power; and if the price men have to pay for it is the
sacrifice of friendship, they think their treason will be thrown into
the shade by the magnitude of the reward. This is why true friendship
is very difficult to find among those who engage in politics and the
contest for office. Where can you find the man to prefer his friend's
advancement to his own? And to say nothing of that, think how grievous
and almost intolerable it is to most men to share political disaster.
You will scarcely find anyone who can bring himself to do that. And
though what Ennius says is quite true,--" the hour of need shews the
friend indeed,"--yet it is in these two ways that most people betray
their untrustworthiness and inconstancy, by looking down on friends when
they are themselves prosperous, or deserting them in their distress. A
man, then, who has shewn a firm, unshaken, and unvarying friendship in
both these contingencies we must reckon as one of a class the rarest in
the world, and all but superhuman.
18. Now, what is the quality to look out for as a warrant for the
stability and permanence of friendship? It is loyalty. Nothing that
lacks this can be stable. We should also in making our selection look
out for simplicity, a social disposition, and a sympathetic nature,
moved by what moves us. These all contribute to maintain loyalty.
You can never trust a character which is intricate and tortuous.
Nor, indeed, is it possible for one to be trustworthy and firm who is
unsympathetic by nature and unmoved by what affects ourselves. We may
add, that he must neither take pleasure in bringing accusations against
us himself, nor believe them when they are brought. All these contribute
to form that constancy which I have been endeavouring to describe.
And the result is, what I started by saying, that friendship is only
possible between good men.
Now there are two characteristic features in his treatment of his
friends that a good (which may be regarded as equivalent to a wise) man
will always display. First, he will be entirely without any make-believe
or pretence of feeling; for the open display even of dislike is
more becoming to an ingenuous character than a studied concealment of
sentiment. Secondly, he will not only reject all accusations brought
against his friend by another, but he will not be suspicious himself
either, nor be always thinking that his friend has acted improperly.
Besides this, there should be a certain pleasantness in word and
manner which adds no little flavour to friendship. A gloomy temper and
unvarying gravity may be very impressive; but friendship should be a
little less unbending, more indulgent and gracious, and more inclined to
all kinds of good-fellowship and good-nature.
19. But here arises a question of some little difficulty. Are there any
occasions on which, assuming their worthiness, we should prefer new to
old friends, just as we prefer young to aged horses? The answer admits
of no doubt whatever. For there should be no satiety in friendship, as
there is in other things. The older the sweeter, as in wines that keep
well. And the proverb is a true one, "You must eat many a peck of salt
with a man to be thorough friends with him." Novelty, indeed, has its
advantage, which we must not despise. There is always hope of fruit,
as there is in healthy blades of corn. But age too must have its proper
position; and, in fact, the influence of time and habit is very great.
To recur to the illustration of the horse which I have just now used.
Every one likes _ceteris paribus_ to use the horse to which he has been
accustomed, rather than one that is untried and new. And it is not
only in the case of a living thing that this rule holds good, but
in inanimate things also; for we like places where we have lived the
longest, even though they are mountainous and covered with forest. But
here is another golden rule in friendship: _put yourself on a level with
your friend_. For it often happens that there are certain superiorities,
as for example Scipio's in what I may call our set. Now he never assumed
any airs of superiority over Philus, or Rupilius, or Mummius, or
over friends of a lower rank still. For instance, he always shewed a
deference to his brother Quintus Maximus because he was his senior, who,
though a man no doubt of eminent character, was by no means his equal.
He used also to wish that all his friends should be the better for his
support. This is an example we should all follow. If any of us have any
advantage in personal character, intellect, or fortune, we should be
ready to make our friends sharers and partners in it with ourselves.
For instance, if their parents are in humble circumstances, if their
relations are powerful neither in intellect nor means, we should supply
their deficiencies and promote their rank and dignity. You know the
legends of children brought up as servants in ignorance of their
parentage and family. When they are recognized and discovered to be
the sons of gods or kings, they still retain their affection for the
shepherds whom they have for many years looked upon as their parents.
Much more ought this to be so in the case of real and undoubted parents.
For the advantages of genius and virtue, and in short, of every kind of
superiority, are never realized to their fullest extent until they are
bestowed upon our nearest and dearest.
20. But the converse must also be observed. For in friendship and
relationship, just as those who possess any superiority must put
themselves on an equal footing with those who are less fortunate, so
these latter must not be annoyed at being surpassed in genius, fortune,
or rank. But most people of that sort are forever either grumbling at
something, or harping on their claims; and especially if they consider
that they have services of their own to allege involving zeal and
friendship and some trouble to themselves. People who are always
bringing up their services are a nuisance. The recipient ought to
remember them; the performer should never mention them. In the case of
friends, then, as the superior are bound to descend, so are they bound
in a certain sense to raise those below them. For there are people who
make their friendship disagreeable by imagining themselves undervalued.
This generally happens only to those who think that they deserve to
be so; and they ought to be shewn by deeds as well as by words the
groundlessness of their opinion. Now the measure of your benefits should
be in the first place your own power to bestow, and in the second place
the capacity to bear them on the part of him on whom you are bestowing
affection and help. For, however great your personal prestige may be,
you cannot raise all your friends to the highest offices of the State.
For instance, Scipio was able to make Publius Rupilius consul, but not
his brother Lucius. But granting that you can give anyone anything you
choose, you must have a care that it does not prove to be beyond his
powers. As a general rule, we must wait to make up our mind about
friendships till men's characters and years have arrived at their full
strength and development. People must not, for instance, regard as fast
friends all whom in their youthful enthusiasm for hunting or football
they liked for having the same tastes. By that rule, if it were a mere
question of time, no one would have such claims on our affections as
nurses and slave-tutors. Not that they are to be neglected, but they
stand on a different ground. It is only these mature friendships that
can be permanent. For difference of character leads to difference of
aims, and the result of such diversity is to estrange friends. The sole
reason, for instance, which prevents good men from making friends with
bad, or bad with good, is that the divergence of their characters and
aims is the greatest possible.
Another good rule in friendship is this: do not let an excessive
affection hinder the highest interests of your friends. This very
often happens. I will go again to the region of fable for an instance.
Neoptolemus could never have taken Troy if he had been willing to listen
to Lycomedes, who had brought him up, and with many tears tried to
prevent his going there. Again, it often happens that important business
makes it necessary to part from friends: the man who tries to baulk it,
because he thinks that he cannot endure the separation, is of a weak
and effeminate nature, and on that very account makes but a poor friend.
There are, of course, limits to what you ought to expect from a friend
and to what you should allow him to demand of you. And these you must
take into calculation in every case.
21. Again, there is such a disaster, so to speak, as having to break off
friendship. And sometimes it is one we cannot avoid. For at this point
the stream of our discourse is leaving the intimacies of the wise and
touching on the friendship of ordinary people. It will happen at times
that an outbreak of vicious conduct affects either a man's friends
themselves or strangers, yet the discredit falls on the friends. In
such cases friendships should be allowed to die out gradually by an
intermission of intercourse. They should, as I have been told that Cato
used to say, rather be unstitched than torn in twain; unless, indeed,
the injurious conduct be of so violent and outrageous a nature as
to make an instant breach and separation the only possible course